geekfeminismwikiaorg-20200214-history
Talk:Joss Whedon
Moved to talk page This was an edit to Joss Whedon by User:98.208.53.212 on the "On strong female characters and Whedon as a feminist writer" section. It seems useful for reference, if a little too all caps for the article. :TRY LOOKING AT ALL THE SCHOLARLY BOOKS THAT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN ON JOSS WHEDON'S WORK. THEY'RE OUT THERE AND NOT HARD TO FIND! Ex. Rhonda Wilcox, Lorna Jowett, Stacey Abbott -- all good, scholarly works on Whedon. Thayvian 03:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC) Counterpoint Can I add my defense of Dollhouse as a counterpoint? --Dragonclaws(talk) 10:57, November 14, 2011 (UTC) Criteria for Removal? Can I remove a link on the basis of it being ridiculous? The whole point of the article is that it's supposedly sexist for Dollhouse to give wacky names to the female Actives and traditional male names to the male Actives and suggests some wacky names that are actually feminine given names, clearly missing that the names come from the NATO phonetic alphabet. When readers point this out to her, she turns it around to say that Joss should be transgressive and give traditionally male names to female characters even though that is something rather extraordinary to ask of anyone and is a status quo issue not related to Dollhouse specifically (you could make the same argument of Boy Meets World), therefore not being evidence "Dollhouse is misogynist bullshit". When someone suggests that the dehumanization of the female characters is something deliberately done to create misogynist villains, she links off to a past post that itself links off to an image talking about how the ACLU is misogynistic for defending free speech of people creating BDSM porn (the site of origin also considers it misogynistic that the ACLU would defend free speech of burning a flag but not vandalizing all porn in some random store). Is this what Geek Feminism considers an adequate criticism of Joss Whedon? If not, and I can pull it, could some guidelines be established? --Dragonclaws(talk) 17:10, October 18, 2012 (UTC) Criticism of Firefly The addition of A Rapist's View of the World: Joss Whedon and Firefly was removed, and no reason was given. I have reverted it back into the article, as it IS a criticism of Whedons work from a feminist perspective. 00:59, April 16, 2015 (UTC) :A lot of people take issue with it because it interprets Wash as abusive to Zoe based solely on the author's personal experience with white men fetishizing black women, interprets sarcastic dialog as serious (thereby wildly misinterpreting the characterization), draws the tenuous connection between a joke about going to hell that references child molesters and a joke about molester character in some item of pornography to determine that Joss is a fan, suggests that Joss' wife Kai Cole only stays with him for his money and that he rapes her (because only a rapist could write Firefly), and the author falls squarely into the SWERF and TERF category. I guess it depends if this wiki fakes a modern intersectional third wave stance and has any form of quality control or is merely dedicated to cataloging feminist information. --Dragonclaws(talk) 21:30, April 19, 2015 (UTC) I see that my edit was flagged for using "slurs." I hope this does not indicate that the wiki views TERF as a slur? --Dragonclaws(talk) 23:00, April 19, 2015 (UTC) I see that it does. Well, that explains the acceptance of junk like this. This is disappointing. I will not recommend Geek Feminism Wiki as a worthwhile resource in the future. --Dragonclaws(talk) 23:08, April 19, 2015 (UTC)